ABSTRACT
The British system contained advisory committees and higher appeal bodies, and afforded government departments the power to grant exemptions, while New Zealand witnessed the establishment of a National Efficiency Board and large numbers of local trustee boards in early 1917. The greater cordiality partly resulted from the lesser pressure that the New Zealand exemption system placed on the boards' autonomy. Some disputes did take place between the boards and their military representatives, with members occasionally implying a failure to acknowledge cases of genuine hardship. The strongest evidence of the appeal bodies compliance is in the attitudes of the military representatives. Most tribunals were willing to adopt more rigorous criteria generally. After twice being called together by the military hierarchy to learn of the army's urgent requirements, many appeal bodies used their next sitting to advertise an intention to tighten up.
